Comments by "Kristopher Driver" (@paxdriver) on "Destiny: Politics, Free Speech, Controversy, Sex, War, and Relationships | Lex Fridman Podcast #337" video.
-
1
-
1
-
I suffer from colitis, diabetes, fibromyalgia, etc, etc. You think I want to deprive the world of harmless shock humour just because I'm touchy? Hell no. Context is not just part of it it's most of it. South park laughs at diabetes, it doesn't mock my suffering as a diabetic, it makes me laugh despite being diabetic. What people are confusing these days is feelings and intention. There's malice and there's colour, you can't just decide universally swearing is ok but not that swearing because you feel more strongly, somebody could feel strongly about damn or diarrhea. It's language, if everyone could speak however they want to represent themselves and people could say "hey, I found that offensive" without ever saying "you can't say that" we'd all be better off. If we all learned to put up with the insane things other people say and feel confident in calling them out on it and communicating our disapproval without it being a personal judgment of character over language we'd all be better off.
How about a person with a speaking disability where they can't censor themselves as well, not just Tourette's but ADHD, stroke, or brain fog from medications treating other issues. You don't know my linguistic capability at the time I misspoke, so why is it ok to judge a person's poor choice if words for being inconsiderate while not considering the person may have a culturally motivated provocative way if speaking? Maybe it's PTSD or trauma or bipolarity that puts that chip on their shoulder and taints their mood enough to make word choice poor?
That's not to say it's ok to say anything, or justify it, but it does speak to the severity of which we react to taboo words. It's not ok to say it but it is also not ok to demand the compelled speech if others. You're causing an equally serious problem in retaliation to a serious problem. You're perpetrating an ignorant slight by trying to knee-jerk back away from someone else's ignorant slight. It's not just hipocrisy it's counter productive in the bigger picture.
Don't forget, the internet from the 90's didn't have tracking or persistent usernames, no verification and no moderators. You don't like something you leave, or mute, or rally haters against the abusive person. It was just shock value humour like half of all humour out there from stand-up to family guy and everything in between. Harassment is the joke, crass is what makes it funny. Not everywhere, not at work, but between consenting friends where people voluntarily drop in to watch - why not streaming games, it's not church or a funeral.
Context is everything. If history taught us anything it's that our first response is usually an overreaction just like our prejudices are usually under reactions. We should be able to agree on middle ground where we're still allowed and tolerated to be offensive/offended. There are safe rooms and groups and blocking and subscribing all over the place. There's tons of safe places and generally only people engaged are targeted. We should agree that when a person says "hey that hurt" that everybody should pause immediately to show human concern. Then we can say anything if we take pain seriously and tolerate hurtful speech where possible. That would be ideal if both parties try to bend to the other side rather than hoards telling one group what they can or can't say ir do or laugh at in public. We can agree certain places are more sacred, but game streaming is pretty much football and beer, it's degenerate by design and culture and it's consensual. Just like comedy, there's consent and no malice there. People need to chill out imho.
1
-
1