You contest that anything can be deemed hate speech because "who decides" as if hate speech needs a well-defined list and stipulations of what is hate speech and when it isn't, handed down from some ultimate arbiter and that somehow people of all beliefs and creeds cannot come to a common understanding of such a simple concept.

Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.[1][2] The law of some countries describes hate speech as speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display that incites violence or prejudicial action against a protected group or individual on the basis of their membership of the group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected group or individual on the basis of their membership of the group.

So clearly, no, walking your dog isn't hate speech, neither is anything that doesn't directly fall into the definition above. Who decides is irrelevant at this point, what is wrong with the definition and why and how is all that matters, so do you have any contentions to the definition provided?

Posted using Partiko Android