Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 8114586" data-attributes="member: 177">Which, to beat the same drum... comes with a responsibility you don't talk about much.That's fine.&nbsp; They can think what they want.They don't get to decide how it impacts others, any more than a cook decides whether or not they cause food poisoning through clumsy handling of ingredients.&nbsp; Dude.&nbsp; Freedom of speech goes both ways.&nbsp; Authors don't get to say, &quot;I got to speak first, now you shut up.&quot;&nbsp; Your position would be much, much stronger if you parroted my own point back at me - that the &quot;twitter mob&quot; has the same responsibility for the impact of their words - if they crush creativity with their actions, that's their responsibility.&nbsp; But you missed that opportunity.You again seem to reject the posit.&nbsp; The ultimate issue isn't whether it is offensive, but whether it is HARMFUL.&nbsp; And yes, the author is free to have their own opinion on harmfulness, or offensiveness, even one that flies in the face of evidence and reason, if they really want.&nbsp; Nobody is stopping them.&nbsp; But if you want to live in a pace where you have the freedom to publish your word, you also accept to live in a place where EVERYONE ELSE gets the same freedom.&nbsp; We can have the discussion on whether, say, racist depictions are harmful, if you want.&nbsp; I don't expect the results will work in your favor, though.There is an adage, that when one is used to privilege, equality feels like oppression.&nbsp; Published authors now no longer have the privilege of being the few with a broad platform, able to reach millions.&nbsp; Social media gives everyone a broad platform.&nbsp; And so, it feels like authors are being oppressed, when they are actually getting a taste of equality.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 8114586, member: 177"] Which, to beat the same drum... comes with a responsibility you don't talk about much. That's fine. They can think what they want. They don't get to decide how it impacts others, any more than a cook [I]decides[/I] whether or not they cause food poisoning through clumsy handling of ingredients. Dude. Freedom of speech goes both ways. Authors don't get to say, "I got to speak first, now you shut up." Your position would be much, much stronger if you parroted my own point back at me - that the "twitter mob" has the same responsibility for the impact of their words - if they crush creativity with their actions, that's their responsibility. But you missed that opportunity. You again seem to reject the posit. The ultimate issue isn't whether it is offensive, but whether it is [I]HARMFUL[/I]. And yes, the author is free to have their own opinion on harmfulness, or offensiveness, even one that flies in the face of evidence and reason, if they really want. Nobody is stopping them. But if you want to live in a pace where you have the freedom to publish your word, you also accept to live in a place where [I]EVERYONE ELSE[/I] gets the same freedom. We can have the discussion on whether, say, racist depictions are harmful, if you want. I don't expect the results will work in your favor, though. There is an adage, that when one is used to privilege, equality feels like oppression. Published authors now no longer have the privilege of being the few with a broad platform, able to reach millions. Social media gives everyone a broad platform. And so, it feels like authors are being oppressed, when they are actually getting a taste of equality. [/QUOTE]

Verification