DMCA.com Protection Status

Miss Misanthropist

Writing With Myself

Who Gave You The Right...?

Monica EdwardsComment

One of the most common things I see/hear from SJWs, either directed towards me or someone else is something along the lines of: 

"Who gave you the right to say/do XYZ thing?" 

Part of me wonders if they actually realize how stupid they sound, or if they actually don't understand what freedom of speech is. I mean legitimately do not understand. When someone says something, anything (at least in the country where I currently live) we have an amendment that protects them. The first amendment. The right to free speech. This even means speech that offends people. 

It means that I can say, "Statistically 9 out of 10 people enjoy gang rape" and not be thrown in jail. It also means that someone else can come along and say, "That's not funny, that's offensive to rape victims." To which I can respond, "Well fuck you, you're stupid." That's what free speech is. That's where I am coming from. Most first world nations have something that protects speech like this. Some to a lesser level than others. Some countries (not here) have made it illegal to send death threats online no matter the intent behind them. In America, I can tweet you all the death threats I want via social media and it's protected under free speech. The supreme court ruled it as free speech (obviously only in the event in which there is no intent behind the threat and all of that). Obviously if you tweet that and then show intent or actually do go on to kill someone it's going to be used against you. However, exaggerated threats towards public figures are free speech.

The Supreme Court has said that true threats to another person are not protected speech under the First Amendment, but “political hyperbole” or “unpleasantly sharp attacks” [comedy] are protected speech.

Which SJWs hate. I mean even more than I hate it because I think death threats via twitter are fucking lame. However they want EVERYONE who does it thrown in jail. That is until it's them. 

For some reason, these people seem to want free speech but only as it applies to them. For them to say anything they want and shut down any opposing view point. Which frankly, boggles my damn mind. For instance: 

The same people who are against death threats and telling people to kill themselves will turn around and send death threats and tell people to kill themselves. MOSTLY after they hear an opinion they don't agree with. 

Then of course you get the people who really don't understand hyperbole. Things like, "Women drivers suck". They take it way out of context. I just recently did a video called "Why women shouldn't be put in charge of anything." A video the explains why my two female asshole former bosses where I worked were idiots. Clearly, I didn't mean all women everywhere, nor did I mean any given situation. However, even after watching the video people got really fucking butthurt about it. "SO NO WOMEN SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO ANYTHING CAUSE OF THESE TWO WOMEN!?" Clearly, because of the actual topic of discussion where I ONLY mention 2 specific women I was exaggerating. 

It's kind of like how I have videos with weird titles like "Feminism Vs Nazi Germany". Or "Gender Norms Are A Feminist Invention" or "American Psycho Is A Feminist Movie". The titles are there mainly as clickbait. Which is kind of a shitty thing to do but you also need to be able to grab people's attention if you want to be heard. That's how this world works. The point here is that these people want these laws to protect them but they want the same laws to destroy others. 

Look at it this way. If SJWs got what they wanted and things started to be massively censored, they'd end up censored as well. Every new case would set precedent for the next case. Imagine this scenario: 

Feminists get rape jokes outlawed successfully because they are offensive to rape victims (or some rape victims, whatever, the point is they manage to make rape jokes illegal). 

Then a group of fat women lobby to get fat jokes censored or made illegal. The judge laughs at their fat asses but then they point out that feminists got rape jokes censored on the grounds that they offend rape victims and fat jokes offend fat people. There is now precedence enough to ban fat jokes. 

After that comes the banning of every racial joke imaginable because, well, no shit. Pretty soon we are down to "chicken cross the road jokes" except now the vegans are upset because that some how exploits animals. 

Then we end up in a society where no one can say anything about anyone in a good natured tone because all of it's illegal and we pretty much have to go around expressing ourselves via interpretive dance moves. Until that becomes offensive to epileptics or something. 

My point? Freedom of speech is a two way street. If you want to be able to say something you have to allow people to say the opposite of what you are saying. If you want your own content on the internet you have to allow other people their own content (obviously in accordance to the laws of their country/region). You can't use the same right to condemn someone as you are using to exonerate yourself. If you want to say "death to all white people" then someone else is allowed to say "death to all black people". The only line that should be drawn is when the person saying either thing actually starts to physically harm black people. 

I would never, ever, personally stop anyone from saying what they want. Though I do hold the OPINION (and there's the important word) that a lot of people SHOULD be shut down (or shut up) would I actively shut them down or shut them up? No. I'm still allowed to believe the world would be a lot better of a place if Anita Sarkeesian got banned from Twitter and Youtube. I'm still allowed to believe that TV would be better if Bryan Fuller got hit by a truck and wasn't allowed to remake or adapt any more TV shows. I wouldn't ban Anita myself and I wouldn't run over Bryan Fuller with a truck. I can still hold these beliefs and I can still say these things. Just as anyone who disagrees with me has the right to do that. 

Oh, and by the way, if I CHOOSE to remove a comment from my website or my youtube, that's not censorship. For the love of GOD it's not. That is me removing content I don't like on MY channel. You, however are free to go and write that content literally ANYWHERE else and I won't stop you. The thing is, I'm not going to necessarily let someone come into my house and shit all over the place. If you want to shit all over the place in your own house, by my guest. 

Censorship isn't me removing comments from my youtube videos (and it's rare that I even do this it's really only when someone goes ABOVE AND BEYOND awful and I am sick of dealing with them). Censorship is not allowing comments at all, or ONLY allowing comments that agree with you, or making sure the comments are tailored to project your specific narrative and nothing else. I have plenty of videos where the comment sections are people who disagree with me. Or I have 100 dislikes. It's fine, I don't care. Just realize the difference between free speech, censorship, and WHY everyone has the RIGHT to say ANYTHING they want. At the end of the day they are JUST WORDS and none of them can physically harm you.