[spondylosaurus]

How is it anti-censorship to deliberately refer to someone incorrectly?

If you call a pelican a seagull, I'm not censoring you if I tell you that it's actually a pelican. And if you continue to call it a pelican because you have a problem with seagulls and think they suck, I'm also not censoring you if I point out you're being a jerk. Free speech goes both ways!

[ldipj]

This is more like a seagull that wants everyone to call it a pelican on the dubious basis that it claims to have a 'pelican identity', despite not actually being a pelican.

There's nothing wrong with rejecting that demand and continuing to refer to it as a seagull, is there?