[anon_adderlan]

> if I say "fuck you" it's not really freedom of speech. I directly insulted you, I didn't even want a conversation, I directly harmed you.

But you didn't insult me because that wasn't a statement regarding my character, you clearly established you don't want a conversation, and you caused me no harm whatsoever, direct or otherwise.

#SticksAndStones

That's the problem with restrictions on 'insulting and objectionable' speech. Beyond the fact you just demonstrated how easy it is to get wrong by misapplying the very rules you brought up in this discussion, it also opens the door to claiming any statement regarding someone's character (such as 'incompetent', 'unemployed', 'hypocrite', 'terrorist', etc) is an insult, regardless of how true it is.

Speech becomes harmful when it isolates and marginalizes. It does not become harmful just because it's offensive or enraging. So in the context of this story calling everyone a 'cuck' wasn't harmful, but the otherwise innocuous phrase 'build the wall' was, and coming up with a set of rules which fairly and consistently cover cases like that is likely impossible.