Simping For Hina Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I would usually write a lot about my opinion of this, but I want to see what occurs from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Prager University is complete sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Taken to extremes either side could be really harmful. However I do still believe in most cases it's best to take care with what you say/how you say it. I've said things that were hurtful and I've regretted and wished I didn't. Just because one can say something doesn't mean one should. Freedom of Speech gives me the option to say what I like, but basic morals give me the guidance to use that correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(GigaDrillBreaker) Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Freedom of Speech does not warrant being a douche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugendramon Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I'm just really interested in the fact that a university asks for funds via youtube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VCR_CAT Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 A lot to unpack so I'm gonna just dive right in. People saying bad things sucks. Racism, sexism, bigotry, or just intolerance in general. These kind of things are bad; nobody on the receiving end ever wants to hear these kind of things and I certainly don't blame them. I can see the base reasons for why the "Freedom from Speech" demands began to crop up; people wanted to avoid things like that because nothing good comes from it. It sucks. On the extreme, we take the "fairness" too far and suddenly the good stuff is being censored too because an equal standard is being applied to all subjects and opinions (hence why they weren't allowed to pass out the constitution) without much thought on what the censorship is really being applied to. This is wrong; we need freedom to express and address all kinds of stuff. Further on, re: Trigger Warnings, this is something I don't agree on. Note, I don't think these people are being "babies" or because their problems don't matter; a lot of these people went through some very serious stuff and in no way can serious triggers be pleasant in any way. Yet, I don't think warnings should be necessary. Trigger warnings become barries for artistic and (apparently) political expression. Specifically on the art side of things, it would mean that themes and subjects that people become uncomfortable around aren't tackled as often because it's just one more barrier for the artist to overcome before their art can be consumed and a living can be made. Eventually, artists have to make a financial decision to go with the stuff that won't be barred behind anything; and seeing how the whole thing went down with stopping constitutions being handed and now disinvitations, I honestly kind of expect trigger warnings to escalate into something much more serious. Stuff that makes us uncomfortable needs to be addressed, ESPECIALLY in the art side of things. Good messages and really good things can come out of these themes being addressed; raising awareness of some things or making points of others and helping people understand. the freedom to tackle some very serious stuff that would elicit negative emotions from many people due to the subject being addressed is something that's very critical to artistic expression. Heck, even Hideo Kojima has gone on to say this when discussing controversial themes in MGS V:"If we don't cross that line, if we don't attempt to express what we really want to express, games will only be games... I didn't want to stay away from these things that could be considered sensitive." I understand that people don't like to be uncomfortable, but we need to allow all of it re: speech. The good and the bad. People can say some really, really crappy stuff, but its our responsibility to gain the maturity to avoid hurting others, and its our responsibility to know what to say and when to say it. Just in the same, I understand that triggers can be horrible things, but it's also our responsibility to look up what themes a piece of media may contain before consuming it if the trigger is that bad. This kind of information is readily available, and if certain content elicits a horrible experience for one person, then it's up to them to see if they should experience that material or not. In my opinion, I think we as people should take more responsibility regarding the responsibilities we hold in terms of how we interact with others (what we say and how we say it) and regarding what we consume with media. Making it so that we don't have to do anything while laws and regulations are enforced to take those responsibilities for us is ultimately bad for society as freedom of speech is thrown out the window and ultimately good messages and ideas are being suppressed because of an ideal world that's "comfortable". And bad stuff will crop up, yeah, but we need to come up with better ways of dealing with it than blanket policies that do a lot more damage than good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I frankly just want the right to yell "Fire" in a crowded room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Can't watch on mobile right now, but here's my 2 cents. I believe strongly in freedom of speech in the sense that the government shouldn't regulate stiff directly. That being said, even though some people can be overly sensitive, words are going to have consequences. Nothing is stopping you from saying "kill the jews," but nothing is stopping me from calling you a butt for saying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugendramon Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 If a really deaf person asks you whom you work for, you can now do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethera Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I'm just really interested in the fact that a university asks for funds via youtube.It's not an actual university, so that's probably why. CatspeechI pretty much agree on most of this. Nobody grows from being comforted. Why should a few people's discomfort prevent a controversial book from being read, or an engaging art piece from being viewed? For instance, Shakespeare. He's got some pretty raunchy stuff, and plays that could be considered sexist from our views. Half the class was female and most of us came from conservative families, but we were all able to read and analyze his writings like mature human beings without saying that the plays "triggered" us. I do believe, as a person who's dealt with intolerance since preschool though, that it's only right to encourage people to be considerate with their words, because that crap can scar a person for life and mess them up terribly. Basically, I believe in freedom of expression, but I also believe that people will always be jerks, and there should be consequences for harassment. Still, that doesn't mean that you should stifle anything and everything that goes against your sensibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunar Origins Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 My opinion is this: You do not have freedom from speech; you do however have freedom of speech. That's, fundamentally, how we communicate as a species. Another thing you don't have freedom from is the repercussions of your own freedom of speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King K. Azo Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 This... Really makes me mad. Like, really freakin' mad. I get made fun of, bullied, and beaten on a goddamn funking daily basis and I got the response of "Toughen up"... In first grade all the way to high school. Now in college, I can't offend those people, can't even talk about how it was wrong because it may trigger them (yes, this actually happened). I just... No! Screw them! I can't even speak, but they can just go all guilt free and.... Argh!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Amazing Avian Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 My opinion is this: You do not have freedom from speech; you do however have freedom of speech. That's, fundamentally, how we communicate as a species. Another thing you don't have freedom from is the repercussions of your own freedom of speech.I was gonna do a wall of text, but this is pretty much the point. People should be free to say what they want, however they should keep in mind that it can be offensive to some.I mean think about some really polarizing issue like gay marriage. Both sides can offend the other, but if they were being censored because of it, the issue would just be a taboo subject and never be resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makο Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 You should, without a moment of doubt, have the right to say what you wish, when you wish. Subsequently, you also have the right to make a colossal dick out of yourself in public. Also, maybe be arrested. Depends on what you said and where. This is where things get blurry. Choose your words wisely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 You should, without a moment of doubt, have the right to say what you wish, when you wish. Subsequently, you also have the right to make a colossal dick out of yourself in public. Also, maybe be arrested. Depends on what you said and where. This is where things get blurry. Choose your words wisely.I feel like "right to be arrested" is a bit of a contradiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makο Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I feel like "right to be arrested" is a bit of a contradiction.I didn't necessarily imply the existence of such a thing. Bad sentence structure on my part. Though, that's a fun concept to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forest Fire Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 I feel like "right to be arrested" is a bit of a contradiction.How's "The Right to say what you want, but there will be repercussions, as there are with every other action you decide to take"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 How's "The Right to say what you want, but there will be repercussions, as there are with every other action you decide to take"?Well sure, but what I mean is that being arrested implies that there are laws against that action which means it's not really a right anymore. I could say women have a right to choose even if abortion was illegal because they can always go coat hanger, but that would be disingenuous. Strawman example, but you catch my drift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makο Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Well sure, but what I mean is that being arrested implies that there are laws against that action which means it's not really a right anymore. I could say women have a right to choose even if abortion was illegal because they can always go coat hanger, but that would be disingenuous. Strawman example, but you catch my drift.It could be seen as "yes, you have the right to say whatever you will, but then judgement will be passed based off of the consequence of said free speech." For example, as is most often said, yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater. Yelling fire isn't illegal in its own right, but the panic ensued + probable intent to cause panic would most likely get you in trouble with the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.