Objectification, hate, rape threats: the politicians debating online abuse mean well, but to truly understand, they need to see what I see
Objectification, hate, rape threats: the politicians debating online abuse mean well, but to truly understand, they need to see what I see
That’s also illegal. A rational person would argue to prevent that. An irrational person would suggest that it justifies the regulation of even more speech by an already fascist govt.
Genuinely asking here: do you think the word “illegal” means wrong?
By definition, if a sovereign government decides it’s allowed to do something, it’s not illegal. You could say it’s unethical (though I’m not sure why you would), but you can’t say it’s illegal.
…no? But I think in this particular instance, obviously yes.
…wat? Why would that be illegal?