• munch
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 years ago

    I wish that the United State had both leaders willing to devote bandwidth to issues like this, and populace that cared enough to think critically about their own habits.

    • AgreeableLandscapeOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      I agree. I mean, some might say this is censorship, but you obviously don’t need mukbang videos and if getting rid of them helps the environment, then it’s kind of a no brainer.

        • AgreeableLandscapeOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          I don’t mind censorship in this case either. If the speech/expression is actively harmful, then it absolutely should be censored.

          I agree, which is why I don’t have an issue with just the concept of censorship. There are things that are better off disallowed.

          I will also add that some kinds of expression that is just being (or could be) harmful to a single person is more than enough for something to deserve being hate speech and/or disallowed speech. Bullying for example.

            • AgreeableLandscapeOPM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 years ago

              Still, there is a lot of personally harmful content (content that harms or could harm even one person) that should be in the hypothetical term too.

                • AgreeableLandscapeOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 years ago

                  Well there is content that isn’t strictly “hateful” but is still very harmful. For example, stuff involving sexual abuse or pedophilia.