| The true problem is, what offended 20 years ago, does not offend today. And the same is true for 20 years from now! So how do you codify this? Legislation can't have specific words and actions in it, it would be out of date before it became law! So to target "offensive things", depends upon the opinion of the officers, the prosecutor, and so on! And can change at a moments notice! Oh bewoe to thee, which does not watch twitter and be ware of new words this week! Here's an example. Where I grew up, colloquially, women were called 'chicks' and men 'boys'. "What are you chicks/boys up to", one might say. This was used by extreme feminists too, with zero objection. Flash forward a few years, and in a city 1000km away, I started to describe how I was deeply impressed with the clarity of <female author>, she's a chick to watch. Zero offense at home. None. New city? All the women, and some men in the room, went ballistic. Note that: * I was complementing the intellect of a person * The tone and mannerism I used, was as if I said "woman to watch" Point is, a word which was encouraged and approved by feminists I grew up with, used 1000km away in the same province of my country, meant I was an anti-feminist, woman hater. And how do you legislate that?! And... what you say in one place, can be dangerous in another, all with no ill intent! |
Just don't make laws apply retroactively. Sounds like a trivial problem with a trivial solution. A woman misgendered etc doesn't matter that it was ok 20 years ago. It's not ok now and she did it now.