Is it a bias? I definitely intended to zero in. My bubble is a bunch of podcasts and NYMag articles in which I'm told that the people wanting to shut down speech are doing so to protect ourselves from hateful speech at the expense of expression, discussion, and dissent.
If that is everyone's tool then can we agree that my calling out of one group was bad, but that the sentiment against the idea is correct?
I think you mean "side" as political party or ideology in a way that I don't hold, unless you actually mean siding with "insults should be defined by the insulted" versus "not necessarily."
Can you elaborate on your examples and how they counter something that I claimed? I read both as examples of rhetoric that are best countered by continued discourse and not the false dichotomy presented:
1) you are either permanently an opponent or will accept my idea
2) you are required to engage in violence with me to resolve our difference
I can't find the original comment so some of the context is missing (I can find my comment, though).
If that is everyone's tool then can we agree that my calling out of one group was bad, but that the sentiment against the idea is correct?
I think you mean "side" as political party or ideology in a way that I don't hold, unless you actually mean siding with "insults should be defined by the insulted" versus "not necessarily."
Can you elaborate on your examples and how they counter something that I claimed? I read both as examples of rhetoric that are best countered by continued discourse and not the false dichotomy presented:
1) you are either permanently an opponent or will accept my idea 2) you are required to engage in violence with me to resolve our difference
I can't find the original comment so some of the context is missing (I can find my comment, though).