Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 05:42:48 PM

No I don't believe it is. Saying, "X are the problem," or, "Y are some derogatory term" does not equate to, "we should attack X or Y and/or their property. One can just as well have the attitude that they need to help X or Y instead of feeling the need to get rid of or attack X or Y after hearing rhetoric against them.

I understand that some people are going to get emotional to the point that they snap and become violent, but I don't think it should ever be accepted as something that's okay to do, and as long as someone is not supporting violence as a course of action then I believe they have a right to express their ideas.

All right. So it's not okay to yell "bomb!" because it elicits a dangerous emotional response out of people, but it's perfectly acceptable to belittle people past their breaking point--even though that also elicits a dangerous emotional response.

I guess I just don't see your throughline here.

If you're the type of person who snaps when they're called a certain derogatory term, do you think it's going to matter to you whether it's """okay""" to become violent? Do you think you'd care? Why should you care?

I think there's a clear difference between the emotional response from someone yelling,"bomb!" in an airport and someone yelling "nigger!" Fear for one's life isn't the same thing as rage, and I don't think people should be held as accountable for fearing for their lives as they should be for behaving violently out of rage.

I do believe that if someone is continuously slandering an individual personally, then that individual has a right to take legal action on the basis of harassment. Where to draw the line on harassment is subjective of course, but we do have laws defining it.

However, when a demographic is slandered in a general sense then I don't believe anyone should try to censor the one's slandering it or resort to violence. If an idea is wrong then it is easily undermined by the truth. I get that physically attacking the person slandering a group you identify with can bring catharses, but it isn't just. Their words do not equate to physical violence. Slander them back, if you must, but don't attack them physically. If someone has a vendetta against you as a person then take any legal action you can if you have to, just don't resort to violence against them.

Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 05:00:27 PM

I didn't say anyone was stupid, I only expected that they would understand. The only person I've said was a fool was myself.

Read your post again--"maybe I'm just optimistic about the capacity of other people's understanding"--and tell me that doesn't seem condescending as hell.

Anyway, you've established a limitation to free speech--shouting "bomb!" in a crowded theater is not okay.

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here and ask, why not? It doesn't hurt anybody. It causes people to panic, but that has nothing to do with me or what I've done. Maybe people should control their emotions. Maybe people shouldn't just take word from random strangers. How is that any different than calling a nigger a nigger and then getting beat up for it? Both times, I never hurt anybody. Why are you trying to inhibit my free speech?

I'm just making sure you have an understanding of why you believe what you believe.

Well I guess it does, but I'm the guy who expected people to be able to understand, it seems to be you who's implying that I shouldn't expect that.

I don't think shouting, "bomb!' in an airport should be allowed because it has immediate capacity to cause panic and get people hurt or even killed. Similarly, I don't believe someone should be allowed a platform to say "kill all Jews," or "destroy X and Y's neighborhood and business'," as that is an incitement to violence.

I don't believe a verbal insult equates to physical violence. Two people can insult each other all day long, but the instant one of them resorts to physical violence then they are going too far.

Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 04:45:57 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on February 03, 2017, 04:42:24 PM

Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 04:41:16 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on February 03, 2017, 04:39:45 PM

Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 04:14:52 PM

Please, don't conflate controversial ideas and beliefs with something like yelling, "bomb!" in an airport.

But you did say that all speech is free speech. You can't just fuck around with words like "all" if that's not what you mean.

I'm sorry, it's just an expression. Most people I've encountered don't take it so literally in the context of this argument.

We're talking about speech and whether it's okay to censor it, so I'd elect to choose my words very carefully.

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, and expect that they'll understand the expression and its exceptions. I suppose it's a bit foolish but maybe I'm just optimistic about the capacity of other people's understanding.

So if I say that all X are Y, and you provide me with a counterexample that demonstrates otherwise, I can just turn around and say, "Well, it was just an expression; I guess you were just too stupid to understand that."

That's kinda nifty, I'll have to keep that in mind.

I didn't say anyone was stupid, I only expected that they would understand. The only person I've said was a fool was myself.

Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 04:14:52 PM

Please, don't conflate controversial ideas and beliefs with something like yelling, "bomb!" in an airport.

But you did say that all speech is free speech. You can't just fuck around with words like "all" if that's not what you mean.

I'm sorry, it's just an expression. Most people I've encountered don't take it so literally in the context of this argument.

Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 02:28:41 PM

All speech is free speech. It is isn't physical then we need not ban it.

I suppose we should be able to yell "bomb" in an airport then or "fire" in public places? What logic is this? Free speech isn't 100% free. It just means the government can't prosecute you because you have different beliefs. That doesn't mean society has to tolerate it all when it dives into simple name calling and racism.

Please, don't conflate controversial ideas and beliefs with something like yelling, "bomb!" in an airport. You have the capacity to understand what I'm referring to as speech in this topic. As long as it isn't physical or an incitement of actual physical violence or panic then it shouldn't be banned.

You, personally, don't have to tolerate racist or insulting rhetoric, but no person or organization should tell other people that they aren't allowed to tolerate it. You need to let people make up their own minds.

Quote from: ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ on February 03, 2017, 01:11:53 PM

Quote from: Luciana on February 02, 2017, 07:13:15 PM

Quote from: ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ on February 02, 2017, 04:28:47 PM

Quote from: Luciana on February 02, 2017, 02:18:14 PM

Allowing a white nationalist to speak about how whites are the superior race and that we should kick immigrants out is not a productive "two way" street at all though. People shouldn't NEED to hear that kind of message because nothing productive comes out of it. It's fascism.

Delete your account.

Hate speech should not be tolerated. It's toxic. Anyone who thinks free speech = say whatever you want without punishment, is stupid. There are limits. And that's just talking with the government. People don't have to put up with it even more so.

Either this is bait disguised as ignorance, or you're too stupid to understand the consequences and implications of what you're advocating. I'm not sure which of these I find more likely.

Do I need to explain to you what's wrong with what you're saying?

You act like this isn't already a thing in other nations. You can't wave a nazi flag or do the salute freely in Germany without a fine. I'm not saying jail people who do it, but just saying "free speech means everything should be free" is naive as hell. It's exactly what helped give rise to right wing fascism.

All speech is free speech. It is isn't physical then we need not ban it.

Offense doesn't dissipate from sheltering people from the offensive material, it dissipates from confronting it and undermining it with the truth.

It is very sad to see so many underestimate the power of truth that they would feel the need to shelter, not only themselves, but other people as well from ignorance and delusion, and deem it necessary that we must lead the new generations instead of letting them lead themselves. 

People need to be trusted and encouraged to create their own morality based on truth. Teaching a person to be mindful, practice critical thinking, and expose him/herself to many ideas, even terrible ones, is one of the greatest gifts anyone can ever give to a person.

Monsters and shit never scared me as a kid but aliens used to freak me out.

This one got to me.

Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 11:35:35 AM

Quote from: Alternative Facts on February 02, 2017, 11:56:35 AM

While I don't condone the protest turning violent and damaging, I also don't agree with Milo being invited to UC Berkley or any other university.

Why? Aren't universities supposed to be a place that exposes you to many different ideas, even those you may disagree with? Isn't the basis for learning and growing in wisdom to observe and study all aspects of life and society, not just those that appeal to you?

And as I've said throughout this thread, I have no problem with conservative views being shared at universities - hell, I wish my college brought more in. But the problem isn't that Milo isn't a conservative; he's an antagonistic far-right persona who has no interest in conducting a mature debate with the audience. In the same vein, I wouldn't approve or want a far-left anarchist to come to my university to rant and rave factless claims and throw insults in lieu of meaningful conversation.

Quote from: Aether on February 03, 2017, 11:35:35 AM

Milo is offensive (as per his act) but I've never heard anything from him that condones actual racism, or misogyny. He doesn't seem to hold any beliefs that are any more radical than the average conservative around here.

Outting trans students to audience members, or as the SFTimes report indicates, planning to publicly name and identify students who may be here illegally (Especially those who are "Dreamers") borders on those subjects, along with others. Which feeds back into my first point - conservative views? Fine. More offensive statements? Sure, if you can do it in a dignified and professional tone.

Milo fails to do such.

I've never seen anything about outing trans audience members or identifying illegal immigrants. Can I get a source for that? It's certainly something I wouldn't agree with.

As for him merely being provocative, I'm not convinced in the slightest for banning him from universities. Comedy shows are held at university (at least they used to be) that have all manner of offensive material.

I will never condone the censorship of someone merely on the basis that they're offensive or provocative. That goes for both the left and the right.

Give all a platform so long as they are not promoting or endorsing real violence, and let people decide for themselves what is or is not right. We should trust in the ability of the next generation to learn for themselves instead of leading them down whatever path it is that we've personally taken. Wisdom doesn't come from teachers, mentors, or leaders. It arises from the self, as I've said before, though clarity and mindful practice from a perspective of minimized bias.

If these rioters had been taught to think critically and question the teachings of others for themselves, and to understand consequence instead of following the group that wants to shelter them from dissenting opinions/ideas, then they probably would have never become so radicalized and violent.

While I don't condone the protest turning violent and damaging, I also don't agree with Milo being invited to UC Berkley or any other university.

Why? Aren't universities supposed to be a place that exposes you to many different ideas, even those you may disagree with? Isn't the basis for learning and growing in wisdom to observe and study all aspects of life and society, not just those that appeal to you?

Milo is offensive (as per his act) but I've never heard anything from him that condones actual racism, or misogyny. He doesn't seem to hold any beliefs that are any more radical than the average conservative around here.

I would very much like to see someone debate him in a rational and mature manner instead of resorting to censorship or violence.

As for this 'hate speech' debacle. Who decides what is and isn't hate speech? Offense is subjective in nature. What gives someone the right to be a moral arbiter for society and censor the things that offend them?

I'm a firm believer in offense being a weakness and a path to folly. I think it's particularly foolish of people to promote and encourage being offended. Wisdom is attained through clarity and mindful practice from a perspective of minimized bias. Offense is a condition of bias and hinders clarity.

those books cost money, thief

I like KOTH. It has the type of humor that appeals to me.

It's pretty ridiculous when someone like Linda Sarsour, who supports sharia law, is speaking at a women's rights protest.

Quote from: Aether on January 27, 2017, 05:53:34 PM

Quote from: Atticus on January 27, 2017, 01:51:35 PM

Quote from: Nuka on January 27, 2017, 12:41:25 PM

Quote from: Dietrich Six on January 27, 2017, 12:22:32 PM

Quote from: Nuka on January 26, 2017, 08:04:49 PM

this thread makes me feel bad because I used to draw every day but I hardly ever do it at all anymore

Get back into it

don't have the motivation for it anymore

Best way to form a habit is to link it to another habit.

Most people draw while listening to music or watching a show they like, maybe that helps. It obviously depends on what you normally do in your spare time.

tbh If Nuka doesn't have the will or the passion for it anymore then there isn't really anything that will help with motivation.

Yeah, it's something I've been dealing with for a few years now. I just don't have the creative energy I used to have and it's kinda depressing. I signed up for a anatomy/figure drawing class (which is a class I've always wanted to take) but ended up dropping it because it felt like I was forcing myself.

My main method of inspiring my self and maintaining my passion is to consistently expose myself to other incredible artists and their work. Always checking DA, pinterest, various forums etc. and having subbed to many youtube artists.

Victim complex?

bans are whack