• Wanderer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why does a foreign country have the absolute say on a principle/ ideology/ human right whatever you want to call it?

    It doesn’t make sense. Are you telling me the ideology of freedom of speech only existed and only continues to exist because it is on a bit of paper written in a far away land?

    • drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      In that “far away land”, yes, because the meaning of freedom of speech (as people, with great fatigue, have tried to tell you) is about consequences related to the government of that “far away land”

      If we want to get to the heart of the matter, that people aren’t fond of your Musk fellating, inceldom riddled comment history that you possibly, unfortunately, decided to export from some sewer on Reddit, that’s not them hating free speech.

        • drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Replace fellating with whatever synonym floats your puritanical boat brother. Nothing wrong with fellating dong but I don’t see the win in pleasuring fascists or otherwise awful people be it literally or figuratively

      • Wanderer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        42
        ·
        1 year ago

        People can hate or love whatever that bit of paper is.

        But freedom of speech (the meaning of those words not some law) is not something most of the world likes.

        The principal meme is that the bottom text is incorrect. He is wrong.

        But he isn’t wrong people do hate freedom of speech.

        • drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The meaning of those words is absolutely some law, whether natural or governmental, and depends entirely upon the context of the power structure involved.

          If you got slapped in your goofy ass face every time you said, well let me just pull up a real, actual quote from you:

          "Women do not want to help men but they expect help from them.

          That doesn’t make me miserable that’s just accepting the world the way it is and it’s a life lesson men tend to learn the hard way."

          If they slapped your extremely goofy, unserious face and called you a generalizing, pathetic, and small person, that wouldn’t be them hating free speech.

          Hell, they’d be exercising it! How wonderful!

          Now, if the government came to your door and impounded your 4 wheel drive incompetence with relationships, then you might have a victorious day in court.

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            Uh yes actually if you physically strike a person when they say something you find “pathetic”, or any other adjective, you are in fact against free speech.

            • Knoxvomica@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              No that’s excercising freedom expression. You are free from persecution from the government, not ostracization socially. Nazis should be punched, not protected. There’s no such thing as free speech for Nazis. Same thing in this case, you say bullshit, people are “free” to react how they will to it.

          • Wanderer@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            19
            ·
            1 year ago

            Freedom to assault and freedom of speech are two different things.

            I respect your right to say I got a goofy ass face and generalizing, pathetic, and small person. I’m truly happy you are able to do that. I just don’t think you disagreeing with me gives you the right to assault me.

            Obviously that thread was full of generalisations and that wasn’t a all women situation it was more about the everyday occurances of everday men. It was written like that for simplicity rather than needed to and “not all but a lot of” every 5 seconds. Still stand by the spirit if that point, which was the important thing.