Many of the complaints about the erosion of Freedom of Speech come from anti-feminists, which make me suspicious. Bloggers and YouTube vloggers frequently take the latest apparent attack on Freedom of Speech, and shout at it. Here is Sargon of Akkad having a go.
Regardless of Sargon's arguments against political correctness, his tone and attitude are a problem. His aggression, his assumptions against the woman he challenges - even the format that apes a conversation but fails to allow any answer to his objections - are all rhetorical tropes to discredit his opponent without engaging with a meaningful dialectical process (that is, a two-way discussion aiming towards an understanding of both sides, and then moving forward).
It could be that the infrastructure of the internet, or cultural bias towards individual expression of idea, or a mutual suspicion on both sides of the debate, militate against the warm, fuzzy chats that meaningful dialectics requires. The impression is one of two sides shouting at each other over a big fence.
In order to conform to the BBC's ideal of fairness, I shall now present a video from a feminist.
The tension being set up in this set of arguments is between the freedom to say anything you like, and the corresponding responsibility not to be offensive. This is caricatured by one side as 'political correctness gone mad', while the other side attempts to define words as either offensive or acceptable.
The idea of 'freedom of listening' doesn't come up too often.
My impression is that this isn't really about freedom of speech, but two competing ideologies having a turf-war. Do I have to pick sides?
