~ archived since 2018 ~

It's not realy MRA but it is sad to see people no longer understanding what free speech means.

AdikaHUN0328

March 4, 2021

12 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	It's not realy MRA but it is sad to see people no longer understanding what free speech means.
Author	AdikaHUN0328
Upvotes	12
Comments	22
Date	March 4, 2021 9:11 AM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/lxgjx6/its_not_realy_mra_but_it_is_sad_to_see_people_no/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/its-not-realy-mra-but-it-is-sad-to-see-people-no.833188 https://theredarchive.com/post/833188

Comments

[–]Ariliescbk 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]AllISaidWasJehovah 10 points11 points12 points 5 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

There's a new element to this though. No one really minds getting criticism for what you say. It's internet mobs threatening companies images unless they fire employees who have gone against the group think.

These might be very low level employees.

It's absolutely not companies firing these people just because they feel like it. They're being threatened.

There's a kind of a semantic exercise going on here. If the government had the power to get people fired because of something they said then it would be impacting their freedom of speech but because it's faceless mobs on the internet it doesn't?

We have protected classes like race, religion, gender etc... You can't be fired because of these things. Maybe it's time we added beliefs and opinions to this list.

After all if all the people behind cancel culture were really interested in was criticising things in the free market of ideas then this wouldn't impact them in the slightest.

Your boss and the company you work for don't own you and you really should be free to express your opinions outside of work without them being able to threaten you into silence.

[–]ujoksimovic 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]AllISaidWasJehovah 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]ujoksimovic 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]AllISaidWasJehovah 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]ujoksimovic -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]AllISaidWasJehovah 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I DO want employers to have the right not to employ people whose public statements and behavior jeopardize the company status.

That is controlling people's opinions and belief because what "jeopardizes the company status" is completely subjective. You could make up any old nonsense and claim that it was doing that.

"This man's deviant sexual proclivities jeopardize the company status!"

See? You can claim almost anything is doing that.

Having free pass on opinions or "only god can judge me" approach is horrifying you are responsible for your attitudes and world is more than welcome to criticize you and dislike you for them.

Criticise and dislike all you want. No one will mind. They never did.

If all you really wanted to do was "criticise and dislike" you wouldn't have the slightest objection to beliefs and opinions being a protected class because that doesn't stop you from "criticising and disliking" in the slightest. But.... surprise, surprise, that's not what you really want to do.

It never was.

[–]reverbiscrap -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AllISaidWasJehovah 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ujoksimovic -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

See? You can claim almost anything is doing that.

Well no, of course you can not, it would not hold in court. Not even sure how to respond to such claim.

If all you really wanted to do was "criticise and dislike" you wouldn't have the slightest objection to beliefs and opinions being a protected class because that doesn't stop you from "criticising and disliking" in the slightest.

Well that is obviously not true. Not even a little bit. Criticism and dislike do extend to action such as avoidance (ie. not hiring someone as they are flat earth propagators or avoiding suppliers that think gay people are gods mistake that should be correct by beatings) which would be discrimination if those were protected. Imagine the situation where a black business owner is legaly required hire a man that wears tshirt about black people being monkeys, because his opinion is protected and can not be discriminated against. Or a women having to employ a man with "legalize rape to reduce depression in man" banner.

[–]AllISaidWasJehovah 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well no, of course you can not, it would not hold in court.

Why wouldn't it? I'll tell you why not. It's because "jeopardize the company status" isn't a legal standard. It's just some vague nonsense you made up.

Criticism and dislike do extend to action such as avoidance

See now we're getting somewhere. Criticism and dislike probably "extend" to all sorts of things like firing people from their jobs.

If that's what you think then just say it.

Imagine the situation where a black business owner is legaly required hire a man that wears tshirt about black people being monkeys, because his opinion is protected and can not be discriminated against.

Who said anything about "hiring"?

No one.

Or a women having to employ a man with "legalize rape to reduce depression in man" banner.

Who said anything about "having to employ"?

Again. No one.

But why not imagine a man being fired for cracking his knuckles.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/sdge-worker-fired-over-alleged-racist-gesture-says-he-was-cracking-knuckles/2347414/

That's why it's a problem. It's because of people like you defending this nonsense.

The difference between that case and your imaginary hypotheticals is that that one actually happened.

[–]LegendOfSmiles 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I absolutely think it’s wrong and disgusting to fire someone for their point of view, but in our “at will” employment climate, there are virtually no protections for employees in a situation like this. You seem to be referencing viewpoint discrimination, but that only applies to government actors. California is one of the only states in the country that has political opinions as a protected class, and they don’t even enforce it. Because it’s a mob of faceless trolls on the internet, there are no real protections. You shouldn’t have to police yourself outside of work when having opinions because at that point, do we really have freedom of speech? If saying that COVID policy is too restrictive, off the clock, (for example) and being fired for it is the consequence, then freedom of speech only cuts one way.

[–]LockeClone 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LegendOfSmiles -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Legally, what you say off the clock has no bearing on your job, but I’m seeing people get fired for it nearly every day. When your opinions are not what the mob thinks is right, and you feel the need to self-censor, do you actually have freedom to speak? If I post on my private Facebook page that I think wearing a mask is stupid, and someone who disagrees sends a screenshot of the post to my boss, and I get fired, was I actually free to say it? My argument is that if having an opinion, on my own time, costs me my livelihood, I don’t actually have the freedom I thought I did. And a faceless mob of trolls on the internet don’t get to decide that.

Edit: I took some bad information and ran with it because it confirmed my priors. I don’t usually do that. But 7 states and 2 counties in the US have the protections I referenced above, according to my research.

I wish it was more though, because a business being able to effectively regulate my speech isn’t freedom.

[–]LockeClone 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Legally, what you say off the clock can absolutely have a bearing on you job. This isn't new...

Who gave you the impression otherwise?

Look, dude: the general idea to be aware of is called "expectation of privacy", and it's very difficult to argue that (legally speaking) when your speech is appearing on a public and permanent forum.

I'm sorry you were lead to believe something else, and I encourage you to learn a bit more about it, as that knowledge will serve you.

The legal eagle on YouTube has a great video about it that's very easy for a layperson to get into.

You seem upset about the way things are and that's fine too. That's why almost every document governing our nation is editable and you get to vote. But arguing when you're ignorant about how the law generally works because your favorite political talking heads told you something is not a good place to launch from.

I say this with love.

[–]AllISaidWasJehovah 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LegendOfSmiles 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AllISaidWasJehovah 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AdikaHUN0328[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Odd-Reference-32 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link